Aspect ratios- Productivity

[fourblank]

Pretty mainstream, 2560x1080(21:9) versus 2560x1440(16:9) ~ 25" (I'm on an ultra-tight budget, HAHA)

Why exactly is 21:9 not as suitable for productivity, or rather, what do people think of those 2, and would recommend for readability? (ie programming/whatever). Enlighten me, people.

Peace.

[comicsansms]

TBH, I would prefer 2 * 22" 16:10 monitors for a productivity standpoint than an Ultrawide! 

 

But 16:10 is abandonware or appleware now but I still like it more than 16:9

[Glenwing]

Depends on what kind of productivity. Anything involving timelines like video/audio editing is pretty great on 21:9 from what I've heard. Other things like 3D modeling and CAD are pretty horrible though. 21:9 monitors are just way too short for that type of work.

[rmac52]

I use tripple 16:9 1080. I'm planning on replacing my center monitor with a 21:9. I do a lot of research, report writing, Excel spreadsheets, and programing. Sometimes all at the same time. So I need the space. If I had to take just 1 I would take 21:9 overy a 16:9 of any resolution. I need the horizontal screen real-estate more tHan verticle.

[fourblank]

I use tripple 16:9 1080. I'm planning on replacing my center monitor with a 21:9. I do a lot of research, report writing, Excel spreadsheets, and programing. Sometimes all at the same time. So I need the space. If I had to take just 1 I would take 21:9 overy a 16:9 of any resolution. I need the horizontal screen real-estate more tHan verticle.

Sweet. That's basically my normal day too. I did think that the horizontal space is perfect for (vertical) split screen coding. I'm just worried that 21:9 on 25" will be weird.

[VZX]

Sweet. That's basically my normal day too. I did think that the horizontal space is perfect for (vertical) split screen coding. I'm just worried that 21:9 on 25" will be weird.

126 PPI is still acceptable to read

 

But for programming, I always vouch for 1440p. That 33% more pixels helps a lot reading longer codes.

Not to say Ultrawide isn't nice. I really appreciate that the fact I can put window in the center and read it (without being obstructed by even a thin bezel). But 3440x1440 Ultrawide is still in premium price atm. So you probably won't get by your "ultra-budget".

[rmac52]

Sweet. That's basically my normal day too. I did think that the horizontal space is perfect for (vertical) split screen coding. I'm just worried that 21:9 on 25" will be weird.

I wouldn't get a 25" 21:9. At 25" there will not be enough hight to the monitor. A 29" 21:9 is as tall as a 24" 16:9. I would get a 29"

[Klefth]

I would go with the 16:9. Same horizontal resolution, higher vertical resolution. I recently made the switch to 1440p from 1920x1200 and those extra vertical pixels are the best. As a translator, it just means I get to keep more segments and lines on sight, without scrolling. <3

IF it was a 3440x1440 ultrawide, then I'd go for that. Basically, I'd just go with the higher resolution my budget could get me for productivity, and since I work with text, I'd never sacrifice any vertical pixels.

Gosh I wish 16:10 never stopped being a thing. I miss it. :<

[Dredgy]

For programming and print design 16:9 in portrait mode and a separate one in landscape for references.

If it's a one monitor solution you need - 21:9 all the way. It's just so much room to work with and 16:9 will never feel the same again.

16:10 as mentioned above is great, but Apple monitors are expensive and you'll likely need thunderbolt.

My personal setup is 4*1080p 16:9s in a pyramid, with two rotatable to portrait plus a 1440p 21:9 and a 4K 16:9 off to the side for timeline editing and playback.

[fourblank]

Looks like 21:9 is the way to go for a 1-monitor set-up. Is 25" 21:9 really that short? By the way, thanks guys.

[fourblank]

Also, any suggestions on 25/27/29" 21:9 monitor? lg-29UM67-P and lg-25UM57-P is what I have in mind right now.

[Glenwing]

Looks like 21:9 is the way to go for a 1-monitor set-up. Is 25" 21:9 really that short? By the way, thanks guys.

 

Yeah 25" 21:9 is really really short. It's equivalent in height to a 21.5" 16:9 display.

[Filipe Campos]

Also, any suggestions on 25/27/29" 21:9 monitor? lg-29UM67-P and lg-25UM57-P is what I have in mind right now.

I love my lg29um57-p, if you have a amd card or planning on getting one lg 29um67-p would be great =P

[bimmerman]

get 2-3 of the Dell 16x10 24" Ultrasharps... u2414? Excellent for office productivity applications, CAD, coding, as well as gaming if you want.

 

I have used 16:9, 21:9, and 16:10 monitors for office/CAD/coding, and the only thing I like about 21:9 is the ability to edit sprawling Excel files easier. I don't care for it much for document or presentation or modeling work. Coding is nice, as you can run 2-3 code files side by side, but you can do that on a normal dual monitor setup as well. 16:9 is awful at everything. Too short vs 16:10 and not wide enough to make up for it.

 

If you really don't like dual monitors then 21:9 makes sense for a lot of word processing or coding type work, as well as wide spreadsheets and video editing. For me...I have reverted back to using antiquated 16x10s. I bought the 21:9 hype and it didn't work for my use case.

 

16:10 master race.